The goal of this game is simple: to come up with the most laughably terrible government schemes one can imagine. I will start.

Betrayatopia: In this society, destroying relations with other nations through deceit and betrayal is the only political objective taken seriously. The society's foreign policy is built around the maxim that "the enemy of my enemy is my friend": by destroying its relationship with every single country, the society believes that it will attain good relations with any country that takes issue with another i.e., will become its friend - a friendship which it plans to exploit in order to fund its future betrayal operations, and repeat the cycle, etc. Common betrayal tactics include declaring war on a country only to claim that it was really someone else, using the loans it gets from other countries to print billions of troll stickers making fun of the creditor, and sending to the U.N. imposters who dress up as and impersonate the ambassadors of other countries and attempt to steal their seats.

-- And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.

"I believe that my powers of mind are surely such that I would have become in a
certain sense a resolver of all problems. I do not believe that I could have remained in
error anywhere for long. I believe that I would have earned the name of Redeemer,
because I had the nature of a Redeemer. "

I know this would be the worst possible thing, but why do you, a Randian, find this bad?

I seriously doubt the elimination of the Black Market would drive cartels to overthrow the government.

What?

It's only 17% of the world's GDP, not enough to destroy a government if all regulations were lifted.

Is the free market a black market now? What are you talking about? Shab said terrible government policy would be lifting all restrictions on the free market. I agreed but thought that was odd for him to say. Where do cartels and the black market come into this?

They are opposites, the black market exists because of a combination of regulations and consumers who disagree with the notion that someone else knows what is better for them.

A free market would destroy any incentive for a Black Market. Some serious players would lose alot of money, but they wouldn't have enough power to destroy a government. Even the Mexico cartels wouldn't be able to defeat the Mexican army.

Crying about how much the Trump wall is going to cost is like a heroin addict complaining about how much the needles cost.

They are opposites, the black market exists because of a combination of regulations and consumers who disagree with the notion that someone else knows what is better for them.

A free market would destroy any incentive for a Black Market. Some serious players would lose alot of money, but they wouldn't have enough power to destroy a government. Even the Mexico cartels wouldn't be able to defeat the Mexican army.

Yes, it would destroy a black market. The unfettered free market itself would be disastrous to any government or society, not the absence of a black market.

They are opposites, the black market exists because of a combination of regulations and consumers who disagree with the notion that someone else knows what is better for them.

A free market would destroy any incentive for a Black Market. Some serious players would lose alot of money, but they wouldn't have enough power to destroy a government. Even the Mexico cartels wouldn't be able to defeat the Mexican army.

Yes, it would destroy a black market. The unfettered free market itself would be disastrous to any government or society, not the absence of a black market.

Unlikely, people aren't going to riot in the streets and overthrow the government because pot and heroin are now easier to get. That's laughable to say the least.

There are way better and more creative ways to do that. Deregulation aint one of them.

Crying about how much the Trump wall is going to cost is like a heroin addict complaining about how much the needles cost.

They are opposites, the black market exists because of a combination of regulations and consumers who disagree with the notion that someone else knows what is better for them.

A free market would destroy any incentive for a Black Market. Some serious players would lose alot of money, but they wouldn't have enough power to destroy a government. Even the Mexico cartels wouldn't be able to defeat the Mexican army.

Yes, it would destroy a black market. The unfettered free market itself would be disastrous to any government or society, not the absence of a black market.

Unlikely, people aren't going to riot in the streets and overthrow the government because pot and heroin are now easier to get. That's laughable to say the least.

There are way better and more creative ways to do that. Deregulation aint one of them.

The free market is not a force for good unless the government is there to provide oversight.

The free market is not a force for good unless the government is there to provide oversight.

Neither are dead beat dads, but those lifestyle choice issues will never, ever lead to a revolt from the people on the level of mass starvation. This is a silly, unoriginal, low impact suggestion for ruining a country. I'm sure you guys can do better.

Crying about how much the Trump wall is going to cost is like a heroin addict complaining about how much the needles cost.

They are opposites, the black market exists because of a combination of regulations and consumers who disagree with the notion that someone else knows what is better for them.

A free market would destroy any incentive for a Black Market. Some serious players would lose alot of money, but they wouldn't have enough power to destroy a government. Even the Mexico cartels wouldn't be able to defeat the Mexican army.

Yes, it would destroy a black market. The unfettered free market itself would be disastrous to any government or society, not the absence of a black market.

Unlikely, people aren't going to riot in the streets and overthrow the government because pot and heroin are now easier to get. That's laughable to say the least.

There are way better and more creative ways to do that. Deregulation aint one of them.

The free market is not a force for good unless the government is there to provide oversight.

Then it's not a free market. Why not just say the free market is bad, and by the way I disagree with you, it's the oversight which has had a negative effect. Because of over regulation, and corporations being in control of regulatory agencies, we no longer have competitive markets. 90% of banking is done by the top 5 banks instead of mom and pop places, drug companies can raise the price of drugs 1200% overnight because the regulations have killed any competition, we get our food from a mere handful of companies, putting us at extreme danger. These corporations have a huge disproportionate amount of power, because of "oversight", which with the revolving door between regulatory agencies and cushy corporate jobs, is just them regulating themselves and abusing the regulatory agencies to squash their competition.

History has proved you wrong on this point Endark. Economies with almost no regulation have had almost everybody as self sufficient independent business owners, but liberals destroyed the free market and now most of the pop is wage slaves

History has proved you wrong on this point Endark. Economies with almost no regulation have had almost everybody as self sufficient independent business owners, but liberals destroyed the free market and now most of the pop is wage slaves

Hell, Even wages are regulated. Basically, every person is just too stupid to commit to a personal work contract. Stupid country, people indoctrinated to truly believe it's a great thing to be treated like a disabled, stupid, incompetent person. Force of good my asz.

Crying about how much the Trump wall is going to cost is like a heroin addict complaining about how much the needles cost.

They are opposites, the black market exists because of a combination of regulations and consumers who disagree with the notion that someone else knows what is better for them.

A free market would destroy any incentive for a Black Market. Some serious players would lose alot of money, but they wouldn't have enough power to destroy a government. Even the Mexico cartels wouldn't be able to defeat the Mexican army.

Yes, it would destroy a black market. The unfettered free market itself would be disastrous to any government or society, not the absence of a black market.

Unlikely, people aren't going to riot in the streets and overthrow the government because pot and heroin are now easier to get. That's laughable to say the least.

There are way better and more creative ways to do that. Deregulation aint one of them.

The free market is not a force for good unless the government is there to provide oversight.

Then it's not a free market. Why not just say the free market is bad, and by the way I disagree with you, it's the oversight which has had a negative effect. Because of over regulation, and corporations being in control of regulatory agencies, we no longer have competitive markets. 90% of banking is done by the top 5 banks instead of mom and pop places, drug companies can raise the price of drugs 1200% overnight because the regulations have killed any competition, we get our food from a mere handful of companies, putting us at extreme danger. These corporations have a huge disproportionate amount of power, because of "oversight", which with the revolving door between regulatory agencies and cushy corporate jobs, is just them regulating themselves and abusing the regulatory agencies to squash their competition.

History has proved you wrong on this point Endark. Economies with almost no regulation have had almost everybody as self sufficient independent business owners, but liberals destroyed the free market and now most of the pop is wage slaves

You would be 100% incorrect. History has proven that no regulation leads to what Upton Sinclair famously called The Jungle. We had a time with no government oversight in the U.S. It was called the Gilded Age, and it was an economic marvel - in that the richest people benefitted and everyone else slaved in inhuman working conditions. Without the government, companies would build orphanages out of arsenic to save a nickel. Monopolies take over everything. Workers are exploited to hell. They labor and labor in perpetual slavery without relief. An unfettered free market is a great evil.

They are opposites, the black market exists because of a combination of regulations and consumers who disagree with the notion that someone else knows what is better for them.

A free market would destroy any incentive for a Black Market. Some serious players would lose alot of money, but they wouldn't have enough power to destroy a government. Even the Mexico cartels wouldn't be able to defeat the Mexican army.

Yes, it would destroy a black market. The unfettered free market itself would be disastrous to any government or society, not the absence of a black market.

Unlikely, people aren't going to riot in the streets and overthrow the government because pot and heroin are now easier to get. That's laughable to say the least.

There are way better and more creative ways to do that. Deregulation aint one of them.

The free market is not a force for good unless the government is there to provide oversight.

Then it's not a free market. Why not just say the free market is bad, and by the way I disagree with you, it's the oversight which has had a negative effect. Because of over regulation, and corporations being in control of regulatory agencies, we no longer have competitive markets. 90% of banking is done by the top 5 banks instead of mom and pop places, drug companies can raise the price of drugs 1200% overnight because the regulations have killed any competition, we get our food from a mere handful of companies, putting us at extreme danger. These corporations have a huge disproportionate amount of power, because of "oversight", which with the revolving door between regulatory agencies and cushy corporate jobs, is just them regulating themselves and abusing the regulatory agencies to squash their competition.

And by the way, it's the fault of the corporations for exploiting the government, not the other way around. Just more proof about how evil they are.

History has proved you wrong on this point Endark. Economies with almost no regulation have had almost everybody as self sufficient independent business owners, but liberals destroyed the free market and now most of the pop is wage slaves

The free market is not a force for good unless the government is there to provide oversight.

Neither are dead beat dads, but those lifestyle choice issues will never, ever lead to a revolt from the people on the level of mass starvation. This is a silly, unoriginal, low impact suggestion for ruining a country. I'm sure you guys can do better.

I have no idea what you're even talking about anymore. All I wanted to know was why Shab of all people said a free market was a bad decision for the government. I never said it would lead to revolts, though it certainly would, because a free market cares about money, not people, and it would just become a conglomeration of monopolies and slave wages, where people are forced to work for pennies and can't get a better deal because all the companies would be offering the same. The ONLY reason corporations pay people is because the government makes them.

And Sinclair's Jungle Dystopia reflected the relatively novel work paradigm shift from agrarian to industrial specific to that just that time period. There was no trained workforce, and no competition for workers. Of course the workers are going to be exploited in that environment. To compare that particular Dystopia to today's paradigm when every baby is born with an Iphone in one hand and a fully funded GED in the other, and a workforce so fluid that they will likely never stay at the same job for more than a year, regardless of the pay regulations, is using some of the laziest critical skills one could ever hope to muster.

Evaluate your Dogma.

Crying about how much the Trump wall is going to cost is like a heroin addict complaining about how much the needles cost.

And by the way, it's the fault of the corporations for exploiting the government, not the other way around. Just more proof about how evil they are.

Gee, I wonder what entity could possibly prosper from circulating this myth? How could you possibly hold fast to the belief that the US government that spends around 35% of the GDP in an exclusive monopolistic fashion, and also has the power to enact any legislation that barely passes constitutional muster backed with the full power of the US military is somehow a victim... a VICTIM... to individual corporations or select conglomerates of corporations?

That's some strong koolaid.

Crying about how much the Trump wall is going to cost is like a heroin addict complaining about how much the needles cost.